Search results

Although literature indicated that business social responsibility (BSR) is now a common practice and accepted norm among business enterprises globally, the concept is not well understood and its influence on business performance is contradictory. Therefore, based on the stakeholder theory, the purpose of this paper is to examine the association among trust of BSR and the performance of small-scale industries in Nigeria with organizational culture as a moderating factor.

The hypotheses of the study were tested using personally administered survey questionnaires; the study obtained 486 valid questionnaires, which were evaluated using SmartPLS Algorithm and bootstrapping functions.

The research findings were established using SmartPLS Algorithm and bootstrapping functions. According to the results, the research constructs have a satisfactory convergent and discriminant validity. Equally, the overall model has a very high predictive relevance. In addition, the results showed that all the predicting variables explained 40 percent variance in the criterion variable. Thus, the study established strong positive influence of trust of BSR on the small-scale industrial performance. Correspondingly, the study established a strong positive impact of organizational culture on the performance of the small-scale industries. However, the study could not establish the moderating influence of organizational culture on the constructs.

The study used perceptions of owner/managers and only small-scale industries.

The research findings may be found beneficial to policy makers and academics, particularly in understanding trust of social responsibility, its influence on performance of small-scale industries and fit between organizational culture and strategic direction of a business enterprise.

The study offers some meaningful contribution to knowledge on BSR by exploring the mechanisms connecting trust of BSR with performance. Also, research expert in the field of BSR usually explores the advantage of these findings by utilizing the action of BSR on internal and external stakeholders.

The study aims to understand the influence of supplier development (SD) activities on supplier satisfaction through the lens of social capital theory (SCT) and to understand the mediating role of the buyer–supplier relationship (BSR) in improving supplier satisfaction (SS).

The research is based on survey of 110 key informants belonging to 50 medium to small supplier companies in the Indian automotive sector. We employed the PLS variance-based modelling technique for the data analysis.

The investigation resulted in a comprehensive framework for SD activities influencing SS. Further findings recognize a positive influence of SD activities such as payment terms and BSR, which are components of structural social capital on the SS. SD activities such as quality management and delivery, which are indicators of relational capital, affect SS through the mediation of BSR.

The study confirms the role of BSR in SS. The deliberations can help the managers of buyer and supplier firms and researchers to classify and strategize SD activities to improve performance and BSR to become preferred customers through SS.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the role that communication, trust and digital transformation can play in the relationship between joint problem-solving and supply chain resilience. More specifically, the authors try to examine the possibility of digital transformation as a replacement for trust within a joint problem-solving context.

A survey instrument was developed and administrated to manufacturing firms within the United Kingdom and the United States. Based on data collected from 291 senior managers, multiple linear regressions were conducted through a customized process model to test the proposed hypotheses.

The results point to the actual impact of digital transformation being far more complicated than the initial benefits that it appears to bring within a supply chain. Thus, technology is only effective when applied within the right context. The authors showcase that the trio of digital transformation, trust and joint problem-solving can be highly valuable to establish supply chain resilience and that further investigation on the interrelationships between these concepts is warranted.

Manufacturing firms that aim to adopt new technologies should not consider advanced digital technologies as an alternative to trust. While digital transformation can improve resource sharing and integration, governance mechanisms–such as trust–will remain the cornerstones of strategic supplier relationships. Therefore, supply chain partners must strive to achieve a balance between trust and the right type of digital technology.

This study contributes to the growing literature focusing on the role that digital transformation can play in developing supply chain capabilities. It adds an early empirical insight on the role of technology and governance in joint problem-solving and supply chain resilience.

The purpose of this study is to review the existing typologies of buyer-supplier relationships (BSRs) in the literature, to critically assess their dimensions and underlying assumptions, and to propose a more complete BSR typology and future directions for BSR typology research.

This study takes a conceptual approach in highlighting the limitations of existing BSR typologies and synthesizing their key typology-defining variables when proposing an alternative BSR typology.

The proposed BSR typology is based on alternative behavioral assumptions: bounded rationality and choice-determinism, and uses relationalism, supplier dependence and buyer dependence as the typology-defining variables. This BSR typology captures four prominent BSR types in the extant literature (i.e. market/discrete relationship, captive-buyer/supplier-dominant relationship, captive-supplier/buyer-dominant relationship and strategic/bilateral partnership) and four new BSR types developed in this study (i.e. supplier-led collaboration, buyer-led collaboration, competitive/win–lose partnership, and free will/voluntary collaboration).

The performance implications of the new BSR types have yet to be empirically tested; however, empirical approaches for future research are discussed.

As BSR typology research has been conducted over the years, a thorough review and systematic assessment of the extant research in terms of fundamental assumptions, typology-defining variables, overall progress and limitations becomes an important reflective task in guiding future research efforts toward the collective advancement in this line of inquiry. Departing from the existing literature, this study also uses more realistic BSR assumptions and a more complete set of typology-defining variables in developing an alternative BSR typology, arguably more complete and more theoretically sound than the previous BSR typologies in the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interrelationship between trust, socialization, and information sharing on the buying firm’s innovation capability in the context of the buyer-supplier relationship (BSR). A nomological model is developed that examines the mediating role of relational capital (supplier trust) on the relationship between structural capital (socialization and information sharing) and innovation capability.

A survey was conducted on 357 US executives. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the hypothesized relationships.

Information sharing and formal socialization activities increased the buying firm’s trust in its key supplier. However, formal socialization activities within the context of the business environment did not have a significant direct impact on buyer’s innovative capabilities; but when mediated by trust, it positively impacted innovation capabilities. Informal socialization within the context of the social environment directly impacted innovation capabilities but trust did not mediate the relationship. Information sharing impacted trust and innovation significantly and trust mediated the impact of information sharing on innovation capabilities.

This study defines the formal and informal aspects of socialization and investigates its impact on trust and buyer innovation capabilities. This is one of the few studies that highlights the mediating role of trust between firms to facilitate innovation capability.

The purpose of this study is to promote Chinese indigenous research by examining a case in which adopting social capital (SC) scales developed in the Western context for Chinese samples can decontextualize inter-firm guanxi management in the Chinese context.

Adopting the existing Western scales to measure SC, we collected data from Chinese executives participating in executive master of business administration programs on buyer–supplier relationship. Using the same items and data source, we identified post hoc factors representing guanxi dimensions. Ordinary least squared regressions were used for both guanxi and SC dimensions to test the hypotheses.

Our analysis showed that Chinese natives responded to the Western SC items according to their understanding and mindsets rooted in guanxi. This was evidenced by the results from the post hoc-derived guanxi dimensions with the same data, which show better regression results for the hypotheses tested, although the construct validity was comparable. Adopting Western SC measurement scales deconceptualized the intricate Chinese context and inter-firm interactions.

It is inappropriate to borrow Western-developed scales for Chinese HRM research due to intricate differences in contexts. Doing so may run the risk of ignoring the Chinese context regarding the mechanisms and processes of complex human interactions, although it may produce superficial results consistent with the Western literature. Developing indigenous measurement scales should be considered not only as a preference but also as a requirement for Chinese management research.

We empirically compared the difference between Western-developed measurement scales and a Chinese indigenous construct, as well as their impact on relationship management in relation to indigenous Chinese management research.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the affective and cognitive dimensions of satisfaction that impact the buyer-supplier relationship (BSR) from the supplier's perspective and to consider satisfaction within the context of power-dependency theory.

Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 20 Chinese apparel supply professionals who regularly interact with apparel buyers. Audio or video interviews were conducted via WeChat (the most popular social media platform in China).

A thematic analysis of the interview data revealed that both affective and cognitive dimensions of satisfaction impact the BSR. A model of supplier affective and cognitive satisfaction in a collaborative BSR was developed to illustrate the connections between the two dimensions.

Due to intense competition in the market, supplier satisfaction is essential for building relationships in the apparel industry. Existing studies have focused on satisfaction from the perspective of the buyer rather than the supplier because in a BSR, the buyer tends to hold more power. Moreover, research has primarily considered cognitive evaluations of satisfaction with the BSR. This study offers new insight on both cognitive and affective satisfaction from the perspective of suppliers within the context of power-dependency theory.

Developing countries are heavily dependent on the resources and commitment of foreign providers to ensure successful adoption of advanced manufacturing technology (AMT). The purpose of this paper is to describe the important role of buyer‐supplier relationships (BSRs) in the process of technology selection, acquisition and implementation.

A survey of 147 Malaysian manufacturing firms is the main instrument used in the research investigations and data analysis is carried out by the structured equation modelling (SEM) technique. In particular, the authors examine the impact on performance of different patterns of relationship between technology buyers and suppliers.

Although the majority of the firms reported improvements in their performance since the acquisition of AMT, closer investigation reveals that those demonstrating a closer relationship with their suppliers are more likely to achieve higher levels of technology and implementation performance (IP) than those that do not.

The paper only assesses the strength of BSR from the buyers' perspective and they may have limited experience of acquisition, whereas suppliers may have more experience of selling AMT. Also, the research is undertaken in Malaysia and the findings may be different in other countries, especially where the technology being acquired is not imported but sourced locally.

The findings relating to BSR, technology acquisition and IP have important implications both for customers and supplier firms as well as for industrial policy makers in developing countries.

The result of the research provides useful insights that are especially pertinent to an improved understanding of BSRs in the procurement of capital equipment, about which the current research literature is limited.

This paper aims to investigate how supply chain risks can be identified in both collaborative and adversarial buyer–supplier relationships (BSRs).

This research includes a multiple-case study involving ten Chinese manufacturers with two informants per organisation. Data have been interpreted from a multi-level social capital perspective (i.e. from both an individual and organisational level), supplemented by signalling theory.

Buyers use different risk identification strategies or apply the same strategy in different ways according to the BSR type. The impact of organisational social capital on risk identification is contingent upon the degree to which individual social capital is deployed in a way that benefits an individual’s own agenda versus that of the organisation. Signalling theory generally complements social capital theory and helps further understand how buyers can identify risks, especially in adversarial BSRs, e.g. by using indirect signals from suppliers or other supply chain actors to “read between the lines” and anticipate risks.

Data collection is focussed on China and is from the buyer side only. Future research could explore other contexts and include the supplier perspective.

The types of relationships that are developed by buyers with their supply chain partners at an organisational and an individual level have implications for risk exposure and how risks can be identified. The multi-level analysis highlights how strategies such as employee rotation and retention can be deployed to support risk identification.

Much of the extant literature on supply chain risk management is focussed on risk mitigation, whereas risk identification is under-represented. A unique case-based insight is provided into risk identification in different types of BSRs by using a multi-level social capital approach complemented by signalling theory.